A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » General Photography » In The Darkroom
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

C41 rotary development



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old June 11th 08, 04:39 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Jean-David Beyer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 247
Default C41 rotary development

Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
In article rIE3k.8112$lE3.5293@trnddc05, Jean-David Beyer
wrote:
Kentmere have this to say about development:

"To maximise d. max, grade spacing and tonal rendition, a multicontrast
chemical system such as Kentmere VC Select Plus Developer and Fixer,
especially formulated to enhance variable contrast emulsions'
characteristics, is recommended. Also recommended, in alphabetical
order are Agfa Multicontrast, Champion B&W Multicontrast, Ilford
Multigrade, Kodak Polymax, and Tetenal Variospeed developers, together
with their appropriate fixers. Equivalent products from other
manufacturers should give similar results.

"We do not recommend conventional manual developers, which tend to
inhibit both d. max and contrast."


This is bizarre. Among other minor issues, Polymax paper developer -- as
far as anyone seems to be able to tell -- *is* Ektaflo Type 1, which was
basically liquid Dektol concentrate.

I have had no trouble with the Kentmere paper in Dektol. I have also
used Edwal Ultra Black with good results.

Wanna see more bizarre? My quote, above, was from Kentmere's uk site. I have
found their USA site, and the corresponding quote is:

"To maximize d-max, grade spacing and tonal rendition standard developers
such as Kodak Dektol, Clayton P20, Nacco Printol, Agfa Neutol Plus, Arista
Premium Paper Developer, Ilford Multigrade Developer, etc. can be used."

--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 11:35:02 up 16:12, 4 users, load average: 4.50, 4.37, 4.32
  #32  
Old June 12th 08, 03:11 AM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Jean-David Beyer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 247
Default C41 rotary development

Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
In article _U93k.903$8q2.402@trnddc02,
Jean-David Beyer wrote:
Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:


I can only assume that as commercial production of photographic material
and chemicals moves from the U.S. to "botique" producers overseas, it will
get worse.

While I was never a fan of VC paper, I think I will have to go with Ilford
Multigrade IV as the least boutique of the manufacturers still in business.


Harman (who own Ilford's wet photography product lines) bought Kentmere
last year and claim they'll keep the Kentmere papers in production.

The Kentmere multigrade paper is, in my opinion, a lot nicer than
Ilford Multigrade.

I was looking at comments about Kentmere on the Internet.
There were quite a batch of complaints in 2006 about Kentmere papers.

There were some complaints that do not concern me much, that seem to be
complaints about curve shape, or difficulties with contrast control. These
may be problems with lack of technique, or genuine artistic questions that
can be resolved only by my testing under my conditions and with my objectives.

On the other hand, there were two problems that concern me.

1.) Apparently the dimensional stability of the paper is very low so if you
tried to flatten it in a dry mount press, the stuff crinkled and was
useless. I fully intend to dry-mount my good prints.

2.) Some people got white film over the print.

A.) Apparently someone actually got in touch with Kentmere and they said the
dimensional stability problems could have been caused by overlong washing
times. The O.P. had soaked them overnight. I used to to that with Ilfobrom
and, while I never got wrinkling, I did get the emulsion falling off the
paper. That was fixed by using wash times of 2 hours or less.

Trouble is, the O.P. shortened his wash times and this did not fix the problem.

B.) I never got white deposits (if that is what they were) on prints. I have
a 5 micron filter at the output of my mixer that supplies water to my print
washer.

Now these all were posted in 2006, IIRC. So either there was no problem, but
just bad processing, or else there was a problem and Kentmere fixed it. Some
suggested that Kentmere had an old factory and could not manage proper
quality control. But if I read their site correctly, they have installed
more equipment for making paper, and pass ISO 9002 quality control standards
and are tested annually. I am not sure how much that matters...

--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 21:50:01 up 1 day, 2:27, 3 users, load average: 4.19, 4.18, 4.18
  #33  
Old June 12th 08, 05:01 AM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Thor Lancelot Simon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 163
Default C41 rotary development

In article 4B%3k.10856$kW2.6752@trnddc01,
Jean-David Beyer wrote:

I was looking at comments about Kentmere on the Internet.
There were quite a batch of complaints in 2006 about Kentmere papers.

[...]
On the other hand, there were two problems that concern me.

1.) Apparently the dimensional stability of the paper is very low so if you
tried to flatten it in a dry mount press, the stuff crinkled and was
useless. I fully intend to dry-mount my good prints.


I flatten all my silver prints in a dry-mount press. I haven't had a problem
with the Kentmere paper. This was the double-weight Fineprint VC? That's
what I use.

I use Perma Wash or Kodak HCA and wash for 30 minutes at 70F, plus another
30 minute wash after toning if I selenium tone (I mix the toner with
PW/HCA). I see no benefit to prolonged wash times and they can take optical
brighteners out of the paper in an uneven way and cause very unpredictable
results, which I do *not* like.

2.) Some people got white film over the print.


Again I haven't seen this. A yellowish-white film can result from
inappropriate use of Ilford's film-strength, short-bath fixing method
before selenium toning -- I used to see it with Elite. I wonder if
that is what they were talking about. People used to the few papers
with which Ilford's fixing method really works well would probably not
be familiar with the results when it does not...

--
Thor Lancelot Simon
"My guess is that the minimal training typically provided would only
have given the party in question multiple new and elaborate ways to do
something incomprehensibly stupid and dangerous." -Rich Goldstone
  #34  
Old June 12th 08, 06:09 AM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 450
Default C41 rotary development

Jean-David Beyer wrote:
pass ISO 9002 quality control standards
and are tested annually. I am not sure how much that matters...


Not much. ISO 9000 (there are several of them, genericly called ISO 9000)
standards only as good as the company wants to be. They refer to a set of
standards and practices that are written by the manufacturer to follow
so that they can set and achieve a specific quality level.

If they follow those standards or the level they set is worth anything
is debatable.

How well they are "tested" depends upon the company they hire to check
that they have fullfiled their goals and followed their procedures. Some
are extremely exacting and really do check, others just read reports and
rubber stamp them.

Certain countries are well known for avoiding certification issues, such
as not reporting problems, "cooking the books" and changing a product the
day after it is certified. This is very common with electronic items as
CE cetification is carried out by the manufacturer and FCC certification
is rarely, if ever, checked.

IMHO it is likely that if Harman actually manufacturers its products in
the UK they do follow their procedures and quality targets, and if the
manufacturing is subcontracted out to China and India, those procedures
and targets are ignored.

Geoff.
--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM
  #35  
Old June 12th 08, 01:08 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Jean-David Beyer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 247
Default C41 rotary development

Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
Jean-David Beyer wrote:
pass ISO 9002 quality control standards
and are tested annually. I am not sure how much that matters...


Not much. ISO 9000 (there are several of them, genericly called ISO 9000)
standards only as good as the company wants to be. They refer to a set of
standards and practices that are written by the manufacturer to follow
so that they can set and achieve a specific quality level.

If they follow those standards or the level they set is worth anything
is debatable.

How well they are "tested" depends upon the company they hire to check
that they have fullfiled their goals and followed their procedures. Some
are extremely exacting and really do check, others just read reports and
rubber stamp them.

Certain countries are well known for avoiding certification issues, such
as not reporting problems, "cooking the books" and changing a product the
day after it is certified. This is very common with electronic items as
CE cetification is carried out by the manufacturer and FCC certification
is rarely, if ever, checked.

IMHO it is likely that if Harman actually manufacturers its products in
the UK they do follow their procedures and quality targets, and if the
manufacturing is subcontracted out to China and India, those procedures
and targets are ignored.

My guess is that Kentmere do manufacture their stuff in the UK:

http://www.kentmereusa.com/kt_main.php?p=ak

This is not proof that they still manufacture their stuff in the UK, but it
suggests it. I am surprised that they did not switch over from "festoon"
production of their paper to continuous processing until 1970, but that is
the English for you.

--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 08:00:01 up 1 day, 12:37, 4 users, load average: 4.14, 4.25, 4.21
  #36  
Old June 12th 08, 01:16 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Jean-David Beyer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 247
Default C41 rotary development

Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
In article 4B%3k.10856$kW2.6752@trnddc01, Jean-David Beyer
wrote:
I was looking at comments about Kentmere on the Internet. There were
quite a batch of complaints in 2006 about Kentmere papers.

[...]
On the other hand, there were two problems that concern me.

1.) Apparently the dimensional stability of the paper is very low so if
you tried to flatten it in a dry mount press, the stuff crinkled and
was useless. I fully intend to dry-mount my good prints.


I flatten all my silver prints in a dry-mount press. I haven't had a
problem with the Kentmere paper. This was the double-weight Fineprint
VC? That's what I use.

I use Perma Wash or Kodak HCA and wash for 30 minutes at 70F, plus
another 30 minute wash after toning if I selenium tone (I mix the toner
with PW/HCA). I see no benefit to prolonged wash times and they can take
optical brighteners out of the paper in an uneven way and cause very
unpredictable results, which I do *not* like.

I wonder about my technique here.

I use a Zone VI archival print washer that runs about 1/2 gallon a minute of
water through it. I process prints one at a time (almost always), and after
a 5-minute rinse in a washing sink after the (last) KHCA treatment, I drop
the sheet into the print washer. I start timing that final rinse after the
last print goes into the washer, so the first sheet in there may be there
for several hours, but the last one is in there only one hour. The only time
I had problems was when I left prints in there overnight, which was in the
early 1970s with Ilfobrom. Never happened with any other paper, although I
quit overnight soaks as soon as I saw Dr. Henry's tests of brightener
washing out whenever his first (?) edition came out. But if Kentmere is
especially sensitive to excess washing, I wonder if I should find some way
to shorten the wet-time of the first prints. I do not print enough at a time
to justify two print washers, but I do not trust the separators in the
washer enough to just keep track of which print is which and remove each one
an hour after I put it in.


--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 08:05:01 up 1 day, 12:42, 4 users, load average: 4.13, 4.15, 4.17
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bronica GS-1 rotary finder question seog Medium Format Photography Equipment 0 January 28th 06 02:59 AM
b/w rotary processing - what works for you? Ralf R. Radermacher In The Darkroom 8 March 8th 05 02:20 AM
New 400TX Rotary X's Too short Indheatec In The Darkroom 3 July 25th 04 01:00 AM
Speed of a rotary tube processor Manuel \(MrFloyd\) Portillo Pérez In The Darkroom 11 June 18th 04 02:49 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.